[ad_1]
The Association of Serbian Journalists (UNS) condemns the action of the director of the H1 program, Jugoslav Cosic, who organized our fellow employees on this television to support the revenge that Cosic is carrying out against UNS in favor of their employers, and against the interests of the public and journalistic ethics.
In recent days, Cosic has launched a whole media complex against the UNS, which is controlled by the heads of the United Group in Serbia and which, in addition to H1, also includes Nova S television and the Nova.rs portal.
H1’s political propaganda, which instead of arguments is based on the events of thirty or more years ago, and the personal disqualifications of the president of the UNS and the president of the UNS Court, which had nothing to do with those ancient events, can not hide the essence of the confusion that H1 made. by mistake of its director.
The Serbian Association of Journalists resented Jugoslav Cosic for finding H1 in violation of basic journalistic rules and for informing the professional public about it, in a professionally impeccable text by Jovana Pesic on the UNS website. Cosic’s revenge against UNS began only when that text was broadcast by the media and Cosic’s political rivals.
Rather than explain or correct his, at first glance, a relatively banal professional failure, H1 accused the UNS of “knowingly giving ammunition to the tabloids.”
But who supplied “ammunition” to the tabloids here, to use the war vocabulary that Cosic chose to take revenge on the UNS? Who slanders his colleagues to hide his own mistake?
It was H1 Television, which reported on September 28 that the Swiss court ruled in favor of Dragan Solak in the dispute between Dragan Solak and Informer, because, keep in mind, “the media accused in court did not prove any of the claims. they publish “.
On that day, H1 withheld the basic information: that the accused media did not prove anything in court, nor did they try to prove it, as the accused media did not even appear in court. In other words, the accused media were not represented in court, their arguments were not heard there, and their lawyers did not even present evidence of the complaints published by the accused media.
It is possible that even if they were, the result would be the same. But H1 Television denied the public important information about how a Swiss court could have rendered a verdict in favor of Dragan Šolak if the defendants did not even appear in court. On what basis did the Swiss court decide to have jurisdiction in this case? What exactly is the verdict, how much is the sentence for those convicted and what are the legal arguments? Has Serbian journalism ever reported on a verdict that no one knew what it was about?
It is still unclear why H1 did not even try to answer those questions, to meet the first requirement of the Serbian Code of Journalists on objective, accurate, complete and timely information.
In the end, why did H1 subsequently change its news of September 28, to retroactively baptize it with the announcement of the businessman?
The answer can be found in the first paragraph of the First Chapter of the Serbian Journalists Code (that of “Truthfulness of information”), where it says that journalists are obliged to report “in an accurate, objective, complete and timely manner” about facts of public interest, respecting the public’s right to know the truth and adherence to the basic standards of the journalistic profession. “It also establishes that” the possible effect of the information published in the media or the owner of the media should not influence the decision on its publication “, and that statements by political parties or other interest groups should be marked as such. In the event that the press release is processed editorially, readers / viewers / listeners should be informed of the main source of information “.
Jugoslav Cosic knew all this even before he secretly changed the old news on the H1 website, but also on September 28, when he falsely presented the N1 owner’s announcement as news from the H1 editorial office. Is it out of place then to ask if under pressure from the owner you are making the mistakes you are making?
Is it still incomprehensible why he booked all H1 journalists and cameramen under the absolute, verifiable and provable lie that “Radomirović and Smajlović have been trying for days to make a ‘case’ that does not exist” (H1 statement of 23 October)? And why does Zaklina Tatalović repeat this lie on his H1 news as his own claim?
Vladimir Radomirović and Ljiljana Smajlović didn’t “try” for days. An excellent young journalist from the UNS website wrote about the failure to report to H1. And Radomirović and Smajlović made public statements only when H1 and Nova S televisions asked them directly about the Swiss verdict.
Which now may give reason to suspect that H1 and Nova S televisions invited the president of the UNS and the president of the UNS Court to their programs, so that Zaklina Tatalović and H1 could accuse them of “trying something” for days. The fact that, on the day that the highest number of people infected with the crown was registered since the beginning of the epidemic, the central newspaper H1 started with an attack of several minutes on the UNS, does not speak in favor of the professionalism of this television.
The staff of H1 had the opportunity to correct their initial omission and answer questions from the professional public. Instead, Jugoslav Cosic settled on the language of the war campaign, “munitions” and politicking over the distant 1990s. Why, when everything could easily be resolved through a professional conversation about journalistic standards?
delivery courier
Author: delivery courier
[ad_2]
